I'd go with the 20D as well, given those choices, and if I had the money (I surely didn't when I got my 300D).

I'd go for the D200 too.

wait I mean the 20D :-p

I'd go with the 20D, I think it may also have more available CF's. Also, isn't the XT made of a different material? The 20D is that impact resistant magnesium stuff, feels great and very solid.

Yeah same material as my old (and gone) 10D. Guess i'll be watching the FM forums in the next month or so, lol.

... What are you talking about, it looks fine in the photos. That's why I got a silver one.

To D2H or not
 

so I have 20D and 2 lenses left on me.
I always envy the images from the Nikon body/lens.
and I was wondering, if you were in my shoe,
would you change 20D to D2H?

I am well aware of 4 MP and a bit more noise compared to my 20D, but hey flagship is flagship right? :P

No. D2Xs is the flagship. The D2h is a camera for high-speed use like shooting sports. Get a D2Xs instead....but are you willing to shell out $5000? Get a D200...you get most of the functions of the D2X, and it's also weather sealed.

At that point, might as well stick with your Canon glass and get a 1Ds mkII

true. but I found d2h for sale at 1200ish.. that's why I was asking :)

nah, D2h's noise is too high at anything over ISO 800. If you want you should look at the D2Hs (yes, D2HS, not just D2H), and it's the best (or 2nd best) ISO performer in the Nikon lineup - better than the D2x, D200, and some say even better than the D50 (best high-ISO performence in the lineup)

4MP is not a problem because the pixel size is so big that it captures quite a bit of details in each one of them, so when you upsize the files they look just as good as a 6 or 8mp (from what I've seen on prints anyway).

I'm waiting til next year for the D3H to come out so all those D2HSs will be quite cheap in the used market. heh heh.

hehe I see.
after few hours of debating if I should go to Nikon or not,
I decided to give few more tries on Canon before I move.
damn that was 8 hours of self debating. lol.

however, I'd love to own D2Hs if time comes and things are
all well :) to me, Nikon's color > canon. :P

Isn't this only because the colorspace that Nikon cameras shoot in by default is different than the one Canon's use? And more to the point, isn't this changeable?

Question for Canon SD600 owners
 

So I've been doing some research on digicams and narrowed my decision between the Canon SD600 and Canon SD630. After reading a few online reviews, I noticed that a few users had commented on how the SD630 does not have a battery life indicator. The camera will only indicate battery life when it has depleted. This is a feature that I don't find very appealing so my question is, does the SD600 have an indicator for battery life? Or is it just like the SD630 whereby no battery life is displayed excepted when it has been depleted.

Thanks in advance for the replies...it'll help me make a better informed decision.

There is a thread entitled "Need advice on a camera? Ask here!"... please use it instead of cluttering our list of threads.

Thanks.

Question for Canon SD600 owners
 

So I've been doing some research on digicams and narrowed my decision between the Canon SD600 and Canon SD630. After reading a few online reviews, I noticed that a few users had commented on how the SD630 does not have a battery life indicator. The camera will only indicate battery life when it has depleted. This is a feature that I don't find very appealing so my question is, does the SD600 have an indicator for battery life? Or is it just like the SD630 whereby no battery life is displayed excepted when it has been depleted.

Thanks in advance for the replies...it'll help me make a better informed decision.

Any good point and shoot digi cams worth looking at right now? My budget is around $400.

Canon PS is not bad.

I'd personally stick to Canon, Or Nikon, as they probably have the most customizable featuers out of most of the cameras out there.

also check out dpreview.com

...or steve's digicams.

why not get the sd700is? i cant decide b/w the sd630 or the 700is.

leanin more towards the 700is b/c of image stabilzer. but the screen isnt 3 inches.. like the sd630..

why cant they just make the sd700is w/ a bigger screen !!!

Tons of great PS cams out there. As long as you pick a reputable name brand you'll probably have no issue. Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Kodak, Panasonic etc etc. Panasonic uses Leica branded optics and Sony uses Carl Zeiss. It's a very competative market, which is very good for us consumers.

I'm currently using an SD300, and I'm disappointed with the graininess of my nightshots (I've tinkered with the ISO setting) and action shots for sports (with no manual settings for shutter speeds, I've just upped the ISO to 400 - aside: are there any other ways of freezing people making fast movements ?)

I think I'm ready to move up from the point and shoot variety, but not entirely ready for digital SLRs. I saw an ad for the Canon S3 IS in the Future Shop and Best Buy flyers this week and am wondering what you guys think of it.

Are there any others that you would recommend that are in that price range ($550-600 pre-tax)? I'm pretty familiar with Canons (I've prevously used an S40 and then SD400). I'm going to Vegas in a month and really want my pictures to turn out well (especially at night).

I also looked at the Canon A700. It's still a point and shoot, but it has a lot more manual features than the SD300. What about the A700? (I'm also really liking the 6x optical zoom on the A700 and the 12x on the S3!)

Thanks in advance!

buy it from bhphoto or buy an s2 is... imo its aboutt he same camera.

I owned an s2 and its an excellent camera.

^ not for night shots though! I think thats the biggest downfall I have with my camera (S2is) the higher iso shots are very grainy. Now the S3is does have a new higher iso setting, but I'm not sure how much it may have improved the picture quality in the lower numbers. I don't think you're going to find any great cameras for night shots without going to a dslr, you may find something acceptable, but theres no comparison really

It hasn't. They raised it to iso 800, but if your shooting in iso 50 it shouldnt be a big problem.

Well I wasn't comparing the lowest iso settings? I was talking about the 200 and 400 settings. If they increased the iso range on the S3, then the 200/400 may now be more acceptable. Theres not as many chances to use iso50 for night shots